How's that great deal looking now?

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby GregPackhamsHeadband » Thu 14 Sep 2017 2:18pm

santazzi wrote:"The sky is falling attitude from some St Kilda supporters this off season is mind boggling."

"This off season"? Beno88...in the 20 or so off seasons I have been on this site...my memory is that the sky has tumbled down in every single one of them...that is our way!

I hope you see the irony of your post, santazzi. A rather hyperbolic response to what I thought was a reasonable question. Never said it was a s*** deal that would end in disaster. My fear is that we might blow it. It may still work out brilliantly. What my concern is, that it doesn't look anywhere near as good as it did when it was made, or when the Hawks looked like finishing right near the bottom. Throw in the fact that JOM's stocks were raised late in the year and the deal starts to look a lot more even.
I think you're pretty tough, don't I?
User avatar
GregPackhamsHeadband
Club Player
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed 02 Aug 2017 8:25pm
Location: Goward's Gulch

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby MC Gusto » Thu 14 Sep 2017 2:22pm

For picks inside top 20 which ones has trout stuffed up?

Genuine question - am interested in opinions

Paddy?

Billings?

Gresh

Acres?

Dunstan?


Goddard?
#1 Acres fan
User avatar
MC Gusto
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4298
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 8:29am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby parkeysainter » Thu 14 Sep 2017 2:36pm

MC Gusto wrote:For picks inside top 20 which ones has trout stuffed up?

Genuine question - am interested in opinions

Paddy?

Billings?

Gresh

Acres?

Dunstan?


Goddard?


Paddy - Unlucky and injured (potential is clearly there)
Billings - Becoming A grade
Fresh - Will be A grade
Acres - Will be A to B grade
Dunstan - Will be A to B grade
Goddard - Unlucky and injured (potential is clearly there)

None have been stuffed up. Each players is exactly what we needed in each draft at the time based on our list and all are tracking well except Paddy and Goddard but that is through no fault of their own or the recruitment team. They have had rotten luck those two and the recruiters or anyone aren't to blame for that. The other players are probably where they should be given their age and time in the game. Only Gresham is ahead of the curve so to speak. He's a better player than anyone else in that list at the same point in their career which shows how talented he is.

If you look at some of the top 20 picks from the past 4-5 years, some aren't even on an AFL list anymore. All of our top 20 players remain and don't look like they're going anywhere. Thats a major win when you analyse each player. If Goddard and Paddy come good its a massive win.
parkeysainter
Club Player
 
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu 20 Jul 2017 2:59am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby MC Gusto » Thu 14 Sep 2017 3:45pm

I tend to agree parkey and i think a few of those were actually outside of top 20, more like top 25.

Therefore my query stands with the OP and his damnation of Trouts recruiting with top 20 picks....
#1 Acres fan
User avatar
MC Gusto
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4298
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 8:29am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby GregPackhamsHeadband » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:06pm

Top 20 or 25. Not much difference. I've broken down Elshaug's record for the six years he's been in charge. I've broken it into the various categories, including the most controversial one, which is the jury is out section. I included players in this category, who for one reason or another have not established themselves as senior players, or haven't been able to break in and show us their tricks. These players have also been plagued by injury, and inconsistent form. Some are whipping boys, others get criticised heavily.

I find it interesting that some of them suddenly become potential stars when some posters try to mount an argument in their own favour. Truth is, we are where we are because those guys are too inconsistent, or not good enough. The majority of them will be gone within three years, if history is anything to go by. For example, McCartin, Goddard and Freeman are going to be stars, aren't they? The evidence shows they've played 31, mostly ordinary senior games between them in a combined 8 seasons at the club. Talk about getting your hopes up in the face of the available evidence. Some call McCartin a spud, others condemn Goddard as too slow, Acres as inconsistent and lacking focus and Freeman as an injury bust, with others describing him as a star who'll magically storm into the senior side and become the next Dangerfield. Others think that everyone on the list will make it. I, for one, hope they all make it and fulfill their potential. Of course, not all of them will. We need a dose of reality. We finished 11th and I think I've made a cogent argument as to why that is so.

Didn't or won't make it: Milera, Saad, Walsh, Minchington, Dunnell, Staley, Maister, Lee, Hickey, White, Wright, Saunders, Murdoch, Delaney, Curren, Lonie, O'Kearney, Pierce, Holmes and Coughlan.

Wins in trade. Roberton, Steele, Membrey, Bruce, Carlisle.

Jury out (not enough evidence one way or another) : McCartin, Goddard, White, Rice, Long, Battle, Phillips, McKenzie, Webster, Freeman, Longer, Marshall, Weller, Savage and Dunstan. I think we'll be lucky if five of these end up making it in the long term. I would add Brown and Stevens as I doubt they'll be in our best 22 in 2019.

Wins in draft: Newnes, Ross, Billings, Acres, Gresham. All on the way to being very good, regular senior players.

Rookie wins : Sinclair. Connellan and Joyce are unknown quantities, but show promise.

So out of 48 picks and trades over 6 years, we are left with 5 from the draft, who are decent players who are consistently performing to a good standard and are showing signs of taking the next step. We have far too many in the jury out category. Most of them have been on our list, or someone else's for a considerable amount of time. The rookie draft has delivered one and trades another 5. Whichever you way you want to argue the case, that is not a good record and an accurate reflection of our ladder position, especially when you consider the strength of our draft position over the past 6 years. No wonder I fear the position we're in now. Our trading for talent has been far better than our drafting, which, quite frankly, has been poor.
I think you're pretty tough, don't I?
User avatar
GregPackhamsHeadband
Club Player
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed 02 Aug 2017 8:25pm
Location: Goward's Gulch

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby takeaway » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:06pm

GregPackhamsHeadband wrote:
takeaway wrote:If its too early to tell, why raise it? On face value, it is one of the most one sided deals ever achieved. End of story.

Not yet it's not. What if we blow the two picks? Get a Kane Tenace and a Barry Brooks for example? The whole outcome depends on what we do with the pick 7 we acquired. Jury out on Long and Battle. The point I made was not that the deal was a mistake, but that we won't know it's real value until much later. If we end up missing out on a traded in gun, then our plan has backfired, or won't be fulfilled as intended. That's a partial fail already. I thought the idea was to get the extra first rounder to throw at a Kelly, Whitfield, Hopper type. Now it looks as though even the less preferred options of Stringer and Rockliff are off the table. Is all that so really so hard to understand? :roll:



I think the idea was to get 3 draft picks, a 1st round & 2 seconds, for 10 & 60 odd. The deal was too good to refuse, and IMO was really to improve our position, not necessarily to draft a Kelly type. Gave us a lot more options/bargaining power whether at the draft or trading.
If we had used pick 10 last year the jury would still be out on who we drafted. Relating the value of the deal to failing to trade in Kelly or the like is illogical in my view. All draft picks/trades are very important - we got extra through the one sided deal.
takeaway
Club Player
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 15 Sep 2011 5:54pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby fugazi » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:14pm

I'm happy to call Webster a win, and also when you consider what we gave up Longer, Savage, Stevens and Dunstan are wins...
They can't all be champions, but if they are good enough ti consistently get a game and contribute then you have to say the recruiter has at least a pass mark.
Nee!
fugazi
SS Hall of Fame
 
Posts: 2202
Joined: Thu 25 Mar 2004 2:47pm
Location: incarnate

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby takeaway » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:16pm

GregPackhamsHeadband wrote:Top 20 or 25. Not much difference. I've broken down Elshaug's record for the six years he's been in charge. I've broken it into the various categories, including the most controversial one, which is the jury is out section. I included players in this category, who for one reason or another have not established themselves as senior players, or haven't been able to break in and show us their tricks. These players have also been plagued by injury, and inconsistent form. Some are whipping boys, others get criticised heavily.

I find it interesting that some of them suddenly become potential stars when some posters try to mount an argument in their own favour. Truth is, we are where we are because those guys are too inconsistent, or not good enough. The majority of them will be gone within three years, if history is anything to go by. For example, McCartin, Goddard and Freeman are going to be stars, aren't they? The evidence shows they've played 31, mostly ordinary senior games between them in a combined 8 seasons at the club. Talk about getting your hopes up in the face of the available evidence. Some call McCartin a spud, others condemn Goddard as too slow, Acres as inconsistent and lacking focus and Freeman as an injury bust, with others describing him as a star who'll magically storm into the senior side and become the next Dangerfield. Others think that everyone on the list will make it. I, for one, hope they all make it and fulfill their potential. Of course, not all of them will. We need a dose of reality. We finished 11th and I think I've made a cogent argument as to why that is so.

Didn't or won't make it: Milera, Saad, Walsh, Minchington, Dunnell, Staley, Maister, Lee, Hickey, White, Wright, Saunders, Murdoch, Delaney, Curren, Lonie, O'Kearney, Pierce, Holmes and Coughlan.

Wins in trade. Roberton, Steele, Membrey, Bruce, Carlisle.

Jury out (not enough evidence one way or another) : McCartin, Goddard, White, Rice, Long, Battle, Phillips, McKenzie, Webster, Freeman, Longer, Marshall, Weller, Savage and Dunstan. I think we'll be lucky if five of these end up making it in the long term. I would add Brown and Stevens as I doubt they'll be in our best 22 in 2019.

Wins in draft: Newnes, Ross, Billings, Acres, Gresham. All on the way to being very good, regular senior players.

Rookie wins : Sinclair. Connellan and Joyce are unknown quantities, but show promise.

So out of 48 picks and trades over 6 years, we are left with 5 from the draft, who are decent players who are consistently performing to a good standard and are showing signs of taking the next step. We have far too many in the jury out category. Most of them have been on our list, or someone else's for a considerable amount of time. The rookie draft has delivered one and trades another 5. Whichever you way you want to argue the case, that is not a good record and an accurate reflection of our ladder position, especially when you consider the strength of our draft position over the past 6 years. No wonder I fear the position we're in now. Our trading for talent has been far better than our drafting, which, quite frankly, has been poor.


Not sure I agree with some of the grading there. Fior a start I would have Longer, Webster, Savage & Dunstan as wins & others very likely with more experience McCartin, White, McKenzie. Anyway, you would need to do a similar analysis of the other 17 teams, and I reckon we would be quite well placed in drafting/trading.
takeaway
Club Player
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu 15 Sep 2011 5:54pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby GregPackhamsHeadband » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:31pm

I wish I was wrong about this and you were right, but we are about where we should be, given how we've done over the past six years. We're nowhere near the better clubs in terms of strike rate, especially when you factor in our very advantageous drafting position in that time. Our rookie picks, traditionally a poor area has been pathetic compared to some others. In fact, when you factor in pick position, we've been poor. Well below average.

As for the players, Longer is still establishing himself and may yet be traded. Savage had a good last month, nothing more. Spent a lot of time at Sandy. Dunstan was dropped three times during the year and Webster is no certainty to be a regular next year. McCartin yes, pending injury, White, yes, pending an attitude adjustment. McKenzie is a no from me. Lacks composure and disposal is not good enough. I didn't write off the "jury's out" players, just preparing people for the reality that the majority won't make it, as it should be. We are several players short of being a premiership contender, so it makes sense we are carrying too many passengers. Don't speculate. Look at the facts as they are. I didn't say anyone of those wouldn't make it. It's just the evidence for them succeeding in the long term is not there yet. I wish it was.
I think you're pretty tough, don't I?
User avatar
GregPackhamsHeadband
Club Player
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed 02 Aug 2017 8:25pm
Location: Goward's Gulch

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Devilhead » Thu 14 Sep 2017 5:43pm

It seems GregPackhamsHeadband is starting to fray at the edges :shock:
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
User avatar
Devilhead
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4520
Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby thejiggingsaint » Thu 14 Sep 2017 6:29pm

fugazi wrote:I'm happy to call Webster a win, and also when you consider what we gave up Longer, Savage, Stevens and Dunstan are wins...
They can't all be champions, but if they are good enough ti consistently get a game and contribute then you have to say the recruiter has at least a pass mark.


Agree with you mate.
Dream the impossible dream: Go Saints! (to hell with the rest!) :D
thejiggingsaint
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 7955
Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Waltzing St Kilda » Thu 14 Sep 2017 6:45pm

Seems like there are a lot of true believers here. Bristle at the very suggestion that all is not rosy.
Everything is going to plan. All will work out well. Those who question the faith are infidels.

Fact is we've got the blandest list (and coaching staff) in a lifetime. Membership and attendance numbers
are bound to be pitiful in 2018 (not least because we'll have, I'd suggest, very few marquee games).

There's a possibility that Richo will pull a rabbit out of a hat and we'll soar up the ladder Richmond-like ...
but at the moment, applying cold-hearted logic, it's not looking likely. Another 9-13 finish in the offing,
if not worse. And after 4-5 years of rebuilding, that's an appalling state of affairs.
User avatar
Waltzing St Kilda
Club Player
 
Posts: 1036
Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2010 5:20am
Location: Melbourne

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby jimmy_slats » Thu 14 Sep 2017 7:33pm

just remember a few things.. dogs sold there contracted captain and picked up the number one pick after his first year in football, gibbs almost went to adelade, josh schlacking just signed a 2-year deal and is on the verge of a trade! anything can happen just because we missed some doesn't mean there isn't some left field surprise around the corner and with what we have cash and picks wise then if any club can do it it will be us.
'WALK THIS WAY!!!!!'
User avatar
jimmy_slats
Club Player
 
Posts: 419
Joined: Mon 05 Nov 2007 10:54am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby GregPackhamsHeadband » Thu 14 Sep 2017 8:16pm

Devilhead wrote:It seems GregPackhamsHeadband is starting to fray at the edges :shock:

Fraying? More like torn. I'm just trying to explore the reasons for our poor performances in big games and the last third of the season. A long time sainter whose opinion I respect told me we're just not good enough yet. Looking at the list I compiled, I think he might be right. Not that it can't be fixed, but at the moment some are basing their optimism on hope rather than reality. If Elshaug's record doesn't give you pause for thought, then you might need to reassess your standards.
I think you're pretty tough, don't I?
User avatar
GregPackhamsHeadband
Club Player
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed 02 Aug 2017 8:25pm
Location: Goward's Gulch

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby SaintPav » Thu 14 Sep 2017 8:38pm

The jury will definitely be in on Trout after this draft, if it's not already. Problem is that it might take a few years to play out and we don't have that long.
User avatar
SaintPav
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 9423
Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
Location: Alma Road

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Impatient Sainter » Thu 14 Sep 2017 8:48pm

The OP has it correct. Last years selection 10 Florent would be in the top 5 this year. Him plus SPP, Bolton and others would be top 10. So the Saints have to turn the 1st 2 x rounders into something special to win on the Hawthorn trade.
Impatient Sainter
Club Player
 
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue 05 Apr 2016 3:30pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Goose is king » Thu 14 Sep 2017 9:15pm

Long and Battle both debuted in their first season. Tell me how they are failed picks. I think both will play 100+ games. Long needs Gresham and Billings to spend more time in the midfield and he needs to be a fierce tackling small forward, no Lonie will help too. This deal was a massive win and has given us a real chance to load up on talent
Goose is king
Club Player
 
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun 27 Jan 2008 9:05am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Goose is king » Thu 14 Sep 2017 9:15pm

Long and Battle both debuted in their first season. Tell me how they are failed picks. I think both will play 100+ games. Long needs Gresham and Billings to spend more time in the midfield and he needs to be a fierce tackling small forward, no Lonie will help too. This deal was a massive win and has given us a real chance to load up on talent
Goose is king
Club Player
 
Posts: 1587
Joined: Sun 27 Jan 2008 9:05am

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Devilhead » Thu 14 Sep 2017 9:16pm

SaintPav wrote:The jury will definitely be in on Trout after this draft, if it's not already. Problem is that it might take a few years to play out and we don't have that long.


What do you mean we don't have that long?

Are we folding as a club?

Have a look at the age of our core youngsters - even in 4 years time they will be only 27 or younger

Our window was always going to be from 2018 onwards - probably up to 2024 - making the finals this year would have been a surprise bonus and with a bit of luck we would have made it

An easier draw next year and with natural improvement from our youngsters should see us playing finals

Supporters pulling their hair out about this year really have no understanding regarding the age profile of our list
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
User avatar
Devilhead
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4520
Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby SaintPav » Thu 14 Sep 2017 9:52pm

Devilhead wrote:
SaintPav wrote:The jury will definitely be in on Trout after this draft, if it's not already. Problem is that it might take a few years to play out and we don't have that long.


What do you mean we don't have that long?

Are we folding as a club?

Have a look at the age of our core youngsters - even in 4 years time they will be only 27 or younger

Our window was always going to be from 2018 onwards - probably up to 2024 - making the finals this year would have been a surprise bonus and with a bit of luck we would have made it

An easier draw next year and with natural improvement from our youngsters should see us playing finals

Supporters pulling their hair out about this year really have no understanding regarding the age profile of our list


I understand the age profile and that we are not folding as a club, yet.

What I mean was that if Trout is no good and it takes a while to play out, he will be in charge for a few more drafts yet and he could do more damage before club wakes up and gets someone good.
User avatar
SaintPav
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 9423
Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
Location: Alma Road

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Dave McNamara » Thu 14 Sep 2017 10:32pm

Devilhead wrote:It seems GregPackhamsHeadband is starting to fray at the edges :shock:

So, should he be afraid? :wink:
It's Dave, man. Will you open up? I got the stuff with me! -------Who?
Dave, man. Open up ------------------------------------------ -----Dave???
Yeah, Dave. ---------------------------------------------------------Dave's not here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOiG1hArSps&feature=player_detailpage

Matt Finnis CEO wrote:"St Kilda is an iconic part of Melbourne which has an identifiable attitude and spirit that is really aligned with where we want to take the club. It is grounded but it is aspirational, it is eclectic, everyone belongs, and we say how do we capture that as an identity? It would be a good move on so many levels for the club."
User avatar
Dave McNamara
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 5127
Joined: Wed 21 Sep 2011 2:44pm
Location: Slotting another one from 94.5m out. Opposition flood? Bring it on...! Keep the faith Saintas!

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby MickThomas » Thu 14 Sep 2017 10:43pm

fugazi wrote:I'm happy to call Webster a win, and also when you consider what we gave up Longer, Savage, Stevens and Dunstan are wins...
They can't all be champions, but if they are good enough ti consistently get a game and contribute then you have to say the recruiter has at least a pass mark.


Longer- see Hickey...one decent year may not be enough to assess true potential.
Same for Sav, Stevens, Dunny, who have shown glimpses but we have to see
how consistent they can be.
So...jury still out.
Maybe, maybe not- just don't know yet.
GregPackhamsHeadband is WellardSaint
MickThomas
Club Player
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Mon 21 Aug 2017 1:23am
Location: Doncaster, Victoria

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby Devilhead » Thu 14 Sep 2017 10:46pm

Dave McNamara wrote:
Devilhead wrote:It seems GregPackhamsHeadband is starting to fray at the edges :shock:

So, should he be afraid? :wink:

Have you ever had sweat in your eye?

It stings!! :evil:
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
User avatar
Devilhead
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 4520
Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby skeptic » Thu 14 Sep 2017 11:31pm

I just don't get the logic of a deal only being a success if recruit the right players...

In 2000, Carlton trade Aaron Hamil for pick 4 (+ Sam Cranage I believe). That was a reasonable trade for them.
How does the fact that they went on to recruit Luke Livingston ahead of Shaun Burgoyne and Scott Thompson make the deal bad.

It's like saying that if a forward takes a big speccy and sprays the shot on goal, that the mark is then not as good
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
 
Posts: 8437
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm

Re: How's that great deal looking now?

Postby GregPackhamsHeadband » Fri 15 Sep 2017 3:48am

If I buy a car for an absolute bargain price, but after a few kilometres it breaks down and needs repairs costing more than I paid for it, does that mean the original deal was still a bargain, or is it now a terrible deal because of the ultimate outcome ? The end result determines the value of the deal and whether or not it was worth doing.
I think you're pretty tough, don't I?
User avatar
GregPackhamsHeadband
Club Player
 
Posts: 461
Joined: Wed 02 Aug 2017 8:25pm
Location: Goward's Gulch

PreviousNext

Return to Saintsational Fan Forum (open to all ages)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot], DJ Higgins, Enrico_Misso, Jewellzy, Mark, one point, parkeysainter and 25 guests